MAYBE WEAVER WAS REFERRING TO SMOKERS
By Jesse L. Byers
Glendale News Press
Aug 21 2008
CA
As a resident of Burbank, I can appreciate the controversy surrounding
Glendale’s proposed smoking ban ("Smoking ban still unsettled,"
July 31).
I was initially opposed to the smoking ordinance that we adopted in
Burbank, and though I think it has its negatives and it is sometimes
a little too far reaching, overall, I admit, it has worked and it
has been successful.
I do believe it is in Glendale’s best interest to adopt a similar
measure.
That being said, it might also be in everyone’s best interest to leave
Glendale City Councilman Dave Weaver alone ("Weaver’s remarks slammed,"
Aug. 7).
I’ve been keeping up on it and I can say that everything I have seen
points to Weaver having no bias or prejudice against anyone.
The lone statement he made that is being targeted is, there is "a lot
of opposition from one segment of the population that loves to smoke."
And the furor arises from the words put in his mouth by a Pasadena
Weekly reporter who claimed Weaver’s comment was referring to the
city’s substantial and politically influential Armenian community.
So why are people so outraged and certain that Weaver himself was
referencing to Armenians?
If he was, maybe he’s right.
According to the Center for Communications, Health and the Environment,
70% of native Armenians smoke, the highest percentage in that part
of the world.
Glendale’s Armenian population is about 80,000 strong. According to
the American Public Health Association, 77% of Armenian men smoke.
Given those statistics, it might be a safe bet that yes, if Weaver
was referring to Armenians then the largest portion of smokers in
Glendale are Armenian.
Then again, he could be way off. See, those 80,000 Armenians are only
about 40% of Glendale’s population.
And, according to the Armenian National Committee-Glendale Chapter,
61% of respondents to a recent survey don’t smoke.
That means Armenians are both a minority in Glendale and a minority
of the city’s smokers.
Accepting all that, Weaver’s comments were identifying only smokers
and no one else.
The newspaper in which the article appeared and the reporter have
both apologized for the statement.
So what’s the problem?
Seems to me people are looking for a reason to be angry, as if they’re
deliberately looking for a reason to brand someone as a bigot.
I know people who say they don’t support Sen. Barack Obama for
president and they’re automatically branded as racists.
Doing so is the same mentality as accusing Weaver of being prejudiced.
In other words, simplistic.
Maybe some people just don’t like Obama’s policies.
And maybe, when Weaver says smokers he just means smokers and not
Armenians.
From: Baghdasarian